Homeless Seek Refuge at Madrid Airport as Rents Soar
On a sweltering May evening, Meza arrived at Barajas airport before 9:00 pm -- just in time to get past security. Any later, and people without a boarding pass are not allowed in under a new policy implemented a week ago to deter the hundreds of homeless people staying overnight.
The measure aims to address the rising number of people sleeping in Spain's busiest airport -- a situation thrust into the spotlight by images showing rows of people lying on the floor among bags and shopping carts, sparking a blame game between government officials.
Those who call Barajas home say the increased scrutiny in Europe's fifth busiest airport is unwelcome.
They doubt solutions will come and fear losing what they see as the safest place to sleep, compared to the streets or the metro in a city where homeless shelters have limited capacity.
"We just want to be left alone," Meza told AFP. "To be treated like people, not animals."
Meza blames Aena, the state-owned company that manages Spanish airports, for mishandling the humanitarian situation that has also occurred to a lesser extent in Barcelona, Gran Canaria, Malaga, Palma de Mallorca and Tenerife.
Aena argues its facilities were never meant to house hundreds of homeless people.
'Look down on you'
Meza said the Barajas security guards know those who cause trouble in the airport.
"The ones who smoke, the ones who drink every day. They should be the ones kicked out, not all of us," he said.
Meza works occasional moving jobs and is hoping to save enough to rent an apartment with his brother. But like elsewhere in Spain, housing prices in the capital have soared and social housing is scarce.
The average monthly rent for a 60-square-meter (645-square-foot) apartment in Madrid has almost doubled to 1,300 euros ($1,415) from about 690 euros a decade ago, according to figures from real estate website Idealista.
Sleeping in Madrid's airport has taken a toll on Meza.
"People look down on you, there's still a lot of racism here," he said, adding that he plans to return to Peru when he turns 50.
Zow, a 62-year-old construction worker from Mali who spends his nights at Barcelona's airport, is also weary of the stares he gets.
"I don't like sleeping here. It's awful, everyone looks at you like this," he said, imitating a look of disdain.
Blame game
Around 421 people were sleeping rough at Madrid's airport in March, a survey by a Catholic charity group counted. Most were men, half had been sleeping at the airport for over six months and 38 percent said they had a job.
Nearly all of them would leave the airport during the day.
The issue has exposed deep divisions among the institutions tasked with addressing homelessness.
City and regional governments in Madrid have clashed with Aena, which operates under the control of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez's Socialist administration.
"Primary social care is the responsibility of the local government," Aena said in a statement, adding the city must fulfil its "legal duty to care for vulnerable populations".
Madrid's conservative Mayor Jose Luis Martinez-Almeida fired back, arguing that the central government controls Aena and "what's happening depends on several ministries".
The city insists that most of those sleeping in the airport are foreigners who should fall under Spain's international protection system.
Despite the finger-pointing, both sides have agreed to hire a consultancy to count and profile those sleeping at the airport. The study results are expected by the end of June.
But Meza is skeptical.
"We don't want help. We don't want anything. We just don't want to be bothered," he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
20 hours ago
- Arab News
Democrats and advocates criticize Trump's executive order on homelessness
SAN FRANCISCO, California: Leading Democrats and advocates for homeless people are criticizing an executive order President Donald Trump signed this week aimed at removing people from the streets, possibly by committing them for mental health or drug treatment without their consent. Trump directed some of his Cabinet heads to prioritize funding to cities that crack down on open drug use and street camping, with the goal of making people feel safer. It's not compassionate to do nothing, the order states. 'Shifting these individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment is the most proven way to restore public order,' the order reads. Homelessness has become a bigger problem in recent years as the cost of housing increased, especially in states such as California where there aren't enough homes to meet demand. At the same time, drug addiction and overdoses have soared with the availability of cheap and potent fentanyl. The president's order might be aimed at liberal cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York, which Trump views as too lax about conditions on their streets. But many of the concepts have already been proposed or tested in California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic mayors have worked for years to get people off the streets and into treatment. Last year, the US Supreme Court made it easier for cities to clear encampments even if the people living in them have nowhere else to go. Still, advocates say Trump's new order is vague, punitive and won't effectively end homelessness. Newsom has directed cities to clean up homeless encampments and he's funneled more money into programs to treat addiction and mental health disorders. His office said Friday that Trump's order relies on harmful stereotypes and focuses more on 'creating distracting headlines and settling old scores.' 'But, his imitation (even poorly executed) is the highest form of flattery,' spokesperson Tara Gallegos said in a statement, referring to the president calling for strategies already in use in California. San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie has also emphasized the importance of clean and orderly streets in banning homeless people from living in RVs and urging people to accept the city's offers of shelter. In Silicon Valley, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan recently pushed a policy change that makes a person eligible for jail if they reject three offers of shelter. Trump's executive order tasks Attorney General Pam Bondi and the secretaries for health, housing and transportation to prioritize grants to states and local governments that enforce bans on open drug use and street camping. Devon Kurtz, the public safety policy director at the Cicero Institute, a conservative policy group that has advocated for several of the provisions of the executive order, said the organization is 'delighted' by the order. He acknowledged that California has already been moving to ban encampments since the Supreme Court's decision. But he said Trump's order adds teeth to that shift, Kurtz said. 'It's a clear message to these communities that were still sort of uncomfortable because it was such a big change in policy,' Kurtz said. But Steve Berg, chief policy officer at the National Alliance to End Homelessness, called parts of the order vague. He said the US abandoned forced institutionalization decades ago because it was too expensive and raised moral and legal concerns. 'What is problematic about this executive order is not so much that law enforcement is involved — it's what it calls on law enforcement to do, which is to forcibly lock people up,' Berg said. 'That's not the right approach to dealing with homelessness.' The mayor of California's most populous city, Los Angeles, is at odds with the Newsom and Trump administrations on homelessness. Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat, opposes punishing sweeps and says the city has reduced street homelessness by working with homeless people to get them into shelter or housing. 'Moving people from one street to the next or from the street to jail and back again will not solve this problem,' she said in a statement.
Arab News
a day ago
- Arab News
UN urges UK to repeal ‘disproportionate' Palestine Action ban
GENEVA: The United Nations rights chief on Friday slammed Britain's ban on activist group Palestine Action as a 'disturbing' misuse of UK counter-terrorism legislation and urged the government to rescind its move. 'The decision appears disproportionate and unnecessary,' Volker Turk said in a statement. The ban, introduced under Britain's Terrorism Act 2000, took effect earlier this month after activists from the group broke into an air force base in southern England. Two aircraft were sprayed with red paint, causing an estimated £7.0 million ($9.55 million) in damage. Turk's statement said the ban raised 'serious concerns that counter-terrorism laws are being applied to conduct that is not terrorist in nature, and risks hindering the legitimate exercise of fundamental freedoms across the UK.' He stressed: 'According to international standards, terrorist acts should be confined to criminal acts intended to cause death or serious injury or to the taking of hostages, for purpose of intimidating a population or to compel a government to take a certain action or not.' But the ban among other things makes it a criminal offense to be a member of Palestine Action, to express support for the group or wear items of clothing that would arouse 'reasonable suspicion' that the person is a member or supporter of the group, Turk pointed out. UK police have arrested at least 200 people during protests, many of them peaceful, over the ban since it took effect, the UN rights office said. Palestine Action itself has condemned its outlawing — which makes it a criminal offense to belong to or support the group, punishable by up to 14 years in prison — as an attack on free speech. The UN high commissioner for human rights agreed. The ban, Turk said, 'limits the rights of many people involved with and supportive of Palestine Action who have not themselves engaged in any underlying criminal activity but rather exercised their rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association.' 'As such, it appears to constitute an impermissible restriction on those rights that is at odds with the UK's obligations under international human rights law.' The rights chief warned that the government's decision 'also conflates protected expression and other conduct with acts of terrorism and so could readily lead to further chilling effect on the lawful exercise of these rights by many people.' 'I urge the UK government to rescind its decision to proscribe Palestine Action and to halt investigations and further proceedings against protesters who have been arrested on the basis of this proscription,' he said. 'I also call on the UK government to review and revise its counter-terrorism legislation, including its definition of terrorist acts, to bring it fully in line with international human rights norms and standards.'
Arab News
a day ago
- Arab News
France's top court annuls arrest warrant against Syria's Assad
PARIS: France's highest court Friday annulled a French arrest warrant against Syria's ex-president Bashar Assad — issued before his ouster — over 2013 deadly chemical attacks. The Court of Cassation ruled there were no exceptions to presidential immunity, even for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. But its presiding judge, Christophe Soulard, added that, as Assad was no longer president after an Islamist-led group toppled him in December, 'new arrest warrants can have been, or can be, issued against him' and as such the investigation into the case could continue. Human rights advocates had hoped the court would rule that immunity did not apply because of the severity of the allegations, which would have set a major precedent in international law toward holding accused war criminals to account. French authorities issued the warrant against Assad in November 2023 over his alleged role in the chain of command for a sarin gas attack that killed more than 1,000 people, according to US intelligence, on August 4 and 5, 2013 in Adra and Douma outside Damascus. Assad is accused of complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity in the case. Syrian authorities at the time denied involvement and blamed rebels. The French judiciary tackled the case under the principle of universal jurisdiction, whereby a court may prosecute individuals for serious crimes committed in other countries. An investigation — based on testimonies of survivors and military defectors, as well as photos and video footage — led to warrants for the arrest of Assad, his brother Maher who headed an elite army unit, and two generals. Public prosecutors approved three of the warrants, but issued an appeal against the one targeting Assad, arguing he should have immunity as a head of state. The Paris Court of Appeal in June last year however upheld it, and prosecutors again appealed. But in December, Assad's circumstances changed. He and his family fled to Russia, according to Russian authorities, after he was ousted by advancing rebels. In January, French investigating magistrates issued a second arrest warrant against Assad for suspected complicity in war crimes for a bombing in the Syrian city of Daraa in 2017 that killed a French-Syrian civilian. The Court of Cassation said Assad's so called 'personal immunity,' granted because of his office, meant he could not be targeted by arrest warrants until his ouster. But it ruled that 'functional immunity,' which is granted to people who perform certain functions of state, could be lifted in the case of accusations of severe crimes. Thus it upheld the French judiciary's indictment in another case of ex-governor of the Central Bank of Syria and former finance minister, Adib Mayaleh, for complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity over alleged funding of the Assad government during the civil war. Mayaleh obtained French nationality in 1993, and goes by the name Andre Mayard on his French passport. Syria's war has killed more than half a million people and displaced millions from their homes since its eruption in 2011 with the then-government's brutal crackdown on anti-Assad protests. Assad's fall on December 8, 2024 ended his family's five-decade rule.
